Harry Moore owed over £13,000 to card firm MBNA, but poorly printed documents
meant the lender's claim was thrown out of court

When Harry Moore was taken to court over spiralling credit card debts, he faced losing both his home and business. Mr Moore, 43, had built up a balance of more than £13,000 on an MBNA credit card, and had failed to meet repayments.

His debts were passed from MBNA to a debt recovery agency, Hillesden Securities, which in November 2013 took him to court.

But the case was thrown out – because the orginal agreement was "impossible to read".

The agreement with Mr Moore had been photocopied so many times that ink was smudged and words merged together. Paul Tilley, representing Mr Moore, said in parts of the document the word "financial" read as "mandel".

He said: “The text was so close, with almost no spacing between sentences. We could barely read it out in court,” he said. “More importantly, it’s not about what the lawyer can read but what the consumer can read so they understand their obligations.”

Neither the card company nor Mr Moore had an original copy of the agreement, dating back to when the card was first taken out. And so, as is common in such cases, MBNA provided a "reconstituted" version of the document to Hillesden, based on copies.

“We have provided this information on many other occasions, to the same standard, without issue,” an MBNA spokesman said.

During the trial in Oxford County Court the judge, Charles Harris, had ordered Hillesden Securities to produce documentation that was more easily legible. It failed to do so. The problem was illustrated when Judge Harris read out Mr Moore’s address incorrectly.

Mr Moore, a financial adviser from Wootton, Bedfordshire, said tthe recession led to his business losing tens of thousands of pounds each year, forcing him to lay off staff. “I went from being the most creditworthy person I’ve ever known to being in the worst situation imaginable,” he said.

“I had a fair few creditors, but most of them understood that my business was in trouble and have generally been great,” he said.

Since he had zero income, the debt agency had in 2009 agreed to allow Mr Moore to repay £1 a month. But in 2013 it launched legal proceedings demanding that he pay back the £13,233.57 plus £290 costs.

Mr Moore said that he felt "consumed by darkness" when the court case began in October 2013. “I was dealing with my father’s death at the time, but it didn’t matter to the debt agency at all. They insisted on a full repayment even though it just wasn’t possible.”

Steve Grimmer, from Hillesden Securities refused to confirm whether Mr Moore, or any of its other customers, had received "illegible" documentation as part of the debt recovery process. He said the debt agency is a member of the Credit Services Agency trade body. “We are governed by this association’s membership rules, so of course we comply by them.

How common are hard-to-read documents?

Mr Moore said that he found from a quick search online that he was not alone. “There are a lot of people being pressured into making unrealistic repayments and not being given the correct information,” he said.

Online research led him to Mr Tilley, who specialises in consumer protection law. He explained that illegible documentation was a problem across the credit industry. “The original credit agreement came from MBNA and was wholly unreadable, evidenced by the repeated, albeit failed, attempts to rewrite it.

"How difficult can it be in the twenty-first century for documents to written clearly for consumers, as opposed to the illegible text presented to the court?” he said.

Debt charity StepChange said that hard-to-read documents were another example of underhand tactics by creditors. A spokesman said: "Crucial words and phrases are on occasion made deliberately difficult to read.

"We have seen examples of people who do have their agreements, ask for copies from their creditors and then see numerous discrepancies, sometimes adding significant levels of interest."

Borrowers: How do I know what my rights are?

Consumers should not be puzzled by illegible documents – whether it is because the type is impossible to read, or because it is full of legal jargon.

Lenders are obliged to provide you a true copy of their agreement that is easy to read.

Mr Moore’s case was thrown out because the debt agency failed to provide legible documents. He should have been sent a readable copy of the agreement, as required by section 78 of the Consumer Credit Act (1974). The debt still stands.

This must contain all the terms and conditions from your original agreement, information about any changes made to the agreement, your name and address at the time that you took out the agreement, and the rate of interest.

Rachel Springall, a lending expert from moneyfacts.co.uk, said: “You don’t have to sift through all of the jargon. You can ring your creditor any time if you have and queries, and they are legally required to speak to you to make sure that you understand any agreement you have."